Tuesday, 16 July 2013

It was announced that an
European Union Parliamentary delegation led by Jean Lambert has arrived inSri Lanka on an Official
visit.It will meet with the
Government, the opposition and other groups during their stay which is due to
last one week.Jean Lambert is the
Chairperson of the EU Delegation for Relations with the Countries of South
Asia.

She is the woman who stated
that she is concerned about reports of threats and attacks on human rights
defenders and journalists in Sri
Lanka and encourages the authorities to hold
those responsible for accountability.Therefore one can be sure that the EU Delegation will not make any
objective observations after their
visit.

These are people who take
it for granted , being “White Europeans” ,that they know every thing happening
in South Asiaand have the solutions for the problems. They come already prejudiced
that the Government is accountable for all problems with regard to the Tamils
of Sri Lanka.

They will officially listen
to the government , but their more important concern will be what the Tamil
people will have to say against the government to confirm their own views and “concerns withthe governments violation of human rights and violation of free
media”.At the endof their visit they may say they are
satisfiedwith the progress that has
been made, but , “there is more to be
done “

These delegations even
before they come know exactly what they are going to say.Therefore Sri Lanka need not be overly exited
bythe visits of these delegations.They will not after seeing the extensive
development projects that have been carried out by the Government after the end
of terrorism, and the government’sremarkable
progress inthe developmentofthe
living conditions ofthe people in the
North and East from what it had been before, make any positive remarks.

There is of coursemore to be done but what has been done just
after four years ofdestructive
terrorism is singular.But these
visiting delegates are unable tolook at
the situation from that point of view and make a statement to encourage the
government and the people.

They will harp on “human rights” and ask for
"accountability".These are their catch
phrases.

On the 11 July,2013 there
was a Televison Programmein France
2 of the French Television , “ Carnet de Voyage d’Envoyer special.” It was a report by a special reporter on Tourism.In the television Magazine announcing the Programme the caption was “ Sri Lanka:
a paradise in troubled waters”.

The introduction read, “ After
thirty years of Civil War (they never use the word terrorism, and for them
there are no terrorists in countries like ours, they are “ freedom fighters” or
“ rebels”), Sri Lanka has become a destination very much sought after, but in
the North of the Island, Tamil families have been stripped of their lands.”

The Special Reporter to Sri Lanka had not bothered toshow to the television spectators the
attractive scenic beauty of the land.They showed a French family of
tourists in a poor village area searching for crocodiles.There were quick shots of the South, but gave
more time to a visit to a village of thatched huts of poor fisher men in the
North along with a Tamil journalist from one of the Tamil Journals which they
said is critical of the Government.

The Journalist took the
special reporter to buildings under construction and explained they were hotels
being constructed by the Ministers of the Government. They showed a barbed wire
fence and said it is a forbidden area where poorer Tamil people lived. The
journalist acting as a guide to the Special Reporter said that the tourists are
taken only to selected areas, as the Tamil people whose lands have been robbed
by the government to construct Hotels
live in deplorable conditions in areas where the tourists are not allowed to
go.

The French Special Reporter
was taken to the buildings under construction.The workersdoing the
construction work, the Tamil Journalist said, were the soldiers.He added speaking to the Special Reporter that, as there is no war the
Sinhala military men are out of work and theynow work in hotel construction to earn money.

There were several building
constructions and the Tamil Journalist said that they are all hotels owned by
Ministers, being built on land “robbed” from the poor Tamil people.He said that25 000 people were made landless in the area.The programme did not boost tourism but confined
to a report of the Tamil people in the North, and how they are being discriminated against by the Government.
The presenter of the programme said in
conclusion , “ behind the beautiful Post Card showing the scenic beauty of Sri Lanka is
theblood and tears of the poor Tamil
peoplerobbed of their lands and left
destitute.”

The West is out to make Sri
Lanka no better than a poor country inAfrica where the Government Ministers and officials make money caring the least for the well being
of the poor Tamil people.That is what every Western
visitor seems to say when they get back to their home countries after enjoying
the hospitality of the people of Sri Lanka.They seek out Journalists like those of the
Udayan News Paper and “swallow” all they say as the Gospel truth.

Saturday, 13 July 2013

The Secretary to the Select
Committee of Parliament to Recommend and Report on Political and Constitutional
Measures to Empower the People of Sri Lanka to Live as One Nation Parliament of Sri Lanka Sri Jayawardenepura,

Kotte,

SRI LANKA

Dear Sir,

Reference to the request made by
the Select Committee of Parliament on the 10th July, 2013, to make
representations with regard to (i) preserve and promote their respective
identity and live with dignity and security as one Nation, (ii) enhance the
unity of the people of Sri Lanka, and (iii) empower the people and the country to promote
social, economic, political and cultural development,I make the following presentation.

The 13 Amendment to the
Constitution of Sri Lanka should be completely and wholely removed for the
following reasons.

The 13 th Amendment to the Constitution
of Sri Lanka could be looked at from two
different points of view.

(i)as
a part of the Constitution of Sri Lanka, without taking into account how and when
it was introduced in to the Constitution, and

(ii)as
a requirement under the Indo Sri Lanka
Peace Accordsigned inJuly,1987, toinclude itin the Constitution of
Sri Lanka as the 13th Amendment in return for India to disarm the Militant groups
and the LTTE terrorists, and establish peace.

Hence, under item (i)there is no problem in keeping orremoving the 13th Amendment considering it only as an Amendment
to the Constitution.Sri Lanka had three Constitutions since its Independence.The Present Constitution was promulgated in
September,1978. It has 18 Amendments.If
the circumstances necessitate, the
Parliament could remove the 13
Amendmentby a mere two third majority
in the Parliamentor seek a mandate from the people to remove it.

All
promulgations of a Constitutions, or
amendments to the Constitution of Sri Lanka could be carried out by the
Parliament of Sri Lanka accept where it is necessary to call for a referendum of the people.No foreign country has the right to intervene
and dictate in the preparation of a Constitution, promulgation or bringing in
Amendments to it.

Under such
circumstances what we do with the 13 Amendment to the Constitution is the
business of Sri Lanka
and not that of any other country in the world.The Parliament could modify the 13 Amendment, or remove it completely
from the Constitution according to the powers vested in it.

But under
item (ii) referred to above, if the 13th Amendment to the
Constitution of Sri Lanka were to be considered a part of the Indo-Sri Lanka
Peace Accord, then the question arisesas to whether there is a legal and
a valuable reason to leave the 13 Amendment in the Constitution of Sri Lanka after March,
1990, when the last IPKF contingent left Sri Lanka having lost 1155 of its
cadre and having failed to settle the on going terrorism or disarm the LTTE and
thedifferent TamilMilitant groups under the terms of the India Sri Lanka Peace Accord- withoutgiving satisfaction to the Peace Accord by India.

The deployment
of an Indian Peace Keeping Force to disarm the LTTE and the different Tamil
militant Groups and establish peace byIndia, in return for Sri Lanka to enter the 13 Amendmentinto the Constitution of Sri Lankaand establish Provincial Councils were the requirementsunder the Peace Accord entered into by Rajiv
Gandhi and JR Jayawardhanasigning the
India Sri Lanka Peace Accord on the 29 July,1987.

Unfortunately
when India withdrew its IPKF
having failed to satisfy the Indo Sri
Lanka Peace Accord, Sri Lanka
had already satisfied its part of the Peace Accord by introducing the 13
Amendment in to the Constitution and establishing Provincial Councils,
believing that India
would be able to disarm the LTTE and the MilitantGroups to end terrorism and establish peace.

However, Sri Lanka did the mistake of not making
provisions in the Peace Accord to hold the insertion of the 13 Amendment into
the Constitution of Sri Lanka until the IPKF showed to the satisfaction of Sri Lankathat it was able to carry out its promise to
disarm the LTTE and the Militant Groups and establish peace.The result of that failure was that Sri Lanka
satisfied its part of the Accord well before IPKF proved not only that it was
incapable of disarming the LTTE, but also that the LTTE terrorists were a force
far stronger thanit expected.

The end
result was that the Indo Sri Lanka Peace
Accord was breached by India
without giving satisfaction to the Accord , with Sri Lanka having an unwanted 13 Amendmentleft in its Constitution.

Therefore the Indo Sri Lanka Peace Accord
entered into by Rajiv Gandhi and JR Jayawardhana was revoked in March, 1990, by
one party to the Peace Accord-namely
India having
failed to give satisfaction. Therefore the Indo Sri Lanka Peace Accord signed
in July,1987 is a defunct instrument without any legal value, and logically the
13th Amendment which is an off shoot of that Accord is now an
illegal instrument which has no place in the Constitution of Sri Lanka.

If in
June,1987 India did not intervene by dropping relief food supplies to the terrorists
held in siegeby the Sri Lanka Armed
Forces, the terrorists would have been defeated and terrorism in Sri Lanka would have been
terminated in 1987.

But because
of the Indian intervention the terrorism continued itsdestructive presence for 22 long years.Therefore, the Indian Government is responsible for all those loss of lives, wounded soldiers and civilians ,damages to material and the economic cost of war during that period.Sri Lanka
Government therefore has a legal right to claim compensation from India.

It is clear
that Since 1987 India had
acted in bad faith vis à vis Sri
Lanka with an ulterior motive. It is an open secret that India took an active role in the defence of terrorism
in Sri Lanka.
It was made evident when India
sent a convoy of unarmed ships in June,
1987 to Jaffna,
followed by airdropping relief supplies
to terrorists in siege.

Sri Lanka
should also not forgetthat in
NJune,1987, the Indian External Affairs
Minister K.Natwar Singh hadsummonedthe Sri Lanka High
Commissioner in New Delhi to inform him of India’s decision to air drop relief
supplies to the rebels(terrorists) and had threatened that if the Indian Operation was
hindered in any way India would launch a full force military retaliation
against Sri Lanka.It was after that Sri Lanka
was forced to sign the Indo Sri Lanka Peace Accord on the 29 July, 1987.

Has India changed since then ?

But Sri Lanka had always acted in good faith
despites India’s
hidden motives.

India fooled Sri
Lanka to accept the 13thAmendment prepared by Indian legal Officers to
facilitate the terrorist toeventually
establish a separateEelam State
by strengthening their hold in the Provincial Council once established.For that purpose North and the Eastern Provinces were merged into one under the
so called Peace Accord.

Sri Lanka naively included the 13thAmendment into the Constitution in good faith
in order to get the Indian Peace Keeping Forceto disarm the LTTE and the Tamil Militant Groups andestablish peace as India had agreed under the Peace
Accord.India however failed to keep its
part of the agreement and abrogated it by pulling out the IPKF in 1990.

India cannot nowclaim any legal right under the defunct Peace
Accord to intervene to demand Sri
Lanka to implement the 13thAmendment.The 13thAmendment is
an appendage that remain from an rescindedaccord and has no legal value.The Sri Lanka Government need notturn to India
to have its consent to remove the unnecessary
vulgar appendage-a symbol of shame, the 13th Amendment.

The
government may get a legal opinion and remove it by a resolution in
Parliamentfailing which it may call for
a referendum.

India has to stop its continued
aggressive demands with regard to the 13thAmendment as India
has lost its right to make such demands as far back as in 1990,and implementing or not implementing the 13thAmendment is now a matter which has to
be decided by Sri Lankaalone, without India’s unnecessary interference.

However, Sri
Lanka has the legal right todemand India to pay compensation for the breach
of the Peace Accord through India’s failure to give satisfaction to the Accord,
resulting in the loss of human lives,
disability to persons and damage to property caused from 1987 to 2009 through terrorism,
plus the economic cost of the war against terrorism to Sri Lanka which is estimated at USDollars 200 billion.

The 13thAmendment has no relevance to Sri Lanka
in its present context, therefore it has no reason to remain as anAmendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka. The
Government of Sri Lanka is making considerable effort to reconcile the
Communities eliminating even the
majority and minority concept of the people.The Tamil people have to be made to accept themselves as a part of the
Sri Lankan people and unite with the other Communities in a Unitary Sri
Lanka.That would not be possible under
the Provincial Council System established under the 13thAmendment which will only perpetuate
separatism.

Sri Lanka should set up a system of Regional Administration
in keeping with its own cultural and social background with a view to eliminate
Communal Separatism.Such a system of Administration should
stretch from village level to Government
as the Centre.In itall Communities should be brought together
preserving their respective identity andassuring security from village level on wards.Such a system will promote unity of the Communities
that will be able to settle differences at village level. It will also pave the
wayfor the people of Sri Lanka as a whole to promote and participate in social, economic, political and inter cultural
developments.

These positive developments will
not be possible under the Provincial Council System which has created an intermediate system of Administration which is
akin to a Parliamentary System, distancing the Provincial Councillors from the
ordinary mass of people , unable to integrate into the different social levels
of the society because of a pseudo sense of a higher economic and social status.

The13thAmendment should therefore be
removedcompletely from the Constitution
of Sri Lanka, which would enhance the Independence of Sri Lanka as a Sovereign
State without India claiming a right to intervene in view of a breached,
andnow defunct Peace Accord to
whichIndia was a party.

Therefore,
it is my opinion that in the interest of our people who should live in dignity and in security amoungtheir fellow country men in peace and harmony,
the 13thAmendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka should
be removedwholely and completely
leaving notrace of it by a two third majority in Parliament, or by a
referendum of the people.

In conclusion I would like to
remind the Select Committee of the Parliament that the President since his election,
without the support of the UNP and the rest of the Opposition, had determined
and carried out under immense difficulties tasks that none other political
leader of Sri Lanka
had dared even attempted, and achieved success.

Therefore, in the removal of the
13th Amendment from the Constitution too he need not dependon the support of the UNP, the TNA andother Political Parties which have only
restricted self interests. The President should without hesitation do what has
to be done in the interest of the people and the country as he has already
proved he is capable of doing, and remove the 13th Amendment to the
Constitution and face boldly any consequences for which he will have the
support of the people.

I pray for the President, the
people and the Country the blessings of the Triple Gem

Wednesday, 10 July 2013

In 1987 India illegally forced into the airspace of Sri Lanka and thereafter forced Sri Lanka to
enter in to an Agreement or an Accord.An agreement , or an Accord is no different to a contract between two
parties, whether it is between two persons, two Companies, or two Counties.It has to have essential basic requirements
to bind the parties legally to the agreement.It should be voluntary.It should
have one or more legalobligations to be performed by one party to
the other.If any of the obligations is not
performed by either one of the parties there would be a breach of the agreement
and it could be rescinded without any legal effect.

India was from the beginning sympathetic
towards the terrorists. They were trained by India
and release in Sri Lanka to
allow the Terrorists to form a separate Eelam State.
The Indian Government has not denied the fact, as it cannot do so as there are
enough evidence of their close involvements with the terrorists of Sri Lanka. In
June,1987 when the terrorists were sieged in Jaffna and were about to be
eliminated by theOperation Liberation
of the Sri Lanka Armed Forces, India senta convoy of armed battle ships to North of Sri Lanka for “humanitarian
Assistant”. The Sri Lanka Navy intercepted the Indian convoy of armed ships and
forced it to turn back.

India then
decided to air drop of relief supplies to the terrorists besieged in Jaffna, and the Indian Minister of External
Affairs K.Natwar Singh summoned the Sri Lanka Ambassador in New Delhi to inform
of the India’s decision to air drop relief supplies to the terrorists, and had
threatenedif the Indian Operation was
hindered in any waythat “India would
launch a full-force military retaliation against Sri Lanka”.

It was
afterthat threat of the IndianExternal Affairs Minister K.Natwar Singh
themilitarily powerful India forced upon militarily powerless Sri Lanka to accept a Peace Accord on the
understanding thatSri Lanka would
not proceed with its military offensive againstthe terrorists.The Accord was
not among equally powerful parties and was not voluntary on the Part of Sri Lanka.

Now the
Pactentered into by JR Jayawardhana on
behalf of Sri Lanka
and Rajiv Gandhi on behalf Indian on the 29 July, 1987 was called Indo-Sri
Lanka Peace Accord. It was an accord of necessity.

However the
Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord was entered into on the acceptance by both parties,
for India:
(i) to resolve the on going terrorism, and (ii) to get the Tamil terrorists to
surrender Arms and establish peace.

andfor Sri Lanka, (i)to devolve power to the Provinces, and (ii)
to withdraw itstroops to their
barracks.

The Sri Lanka readily performed its part of the
Accord by introducing the13Amendment prepared and demanded by India to be included in the Constitution of Sri
Lanka in terms of item (i) of its agreement under the Peace Accord to devolve
power to the Provinces.Sri Lanka also
withdrew its armies to the Barracks under item (ii) of its agreement under the
Indo Sri Lanka Peace Accord.

That means Sri Lanka had
performed its obligations under the Indo Lanka Peace Accord.

Now for
this Peace Accord to be legally binding India had to performs the two items
it had agreed to perform under the Pact.

Now to make
the Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord legally binding on the two parties, India had
to perform its part of the Agreement under the Peace accord to the satisfaction
of Sri Lanka the second party to the Peace Accord, which was to (i) to resolve
the on going terrorism.

Did India
performits part of the Agreement ?

No India failed in
both counts, (i) to resolve the on going terrorism or, (ii) to get the
terrorists to surrender their Arms. The terrorists initially agreed to surrender
their arms, but laterdeclared they will
continue their struggle until they set up an independent Eelam State
and refused to surrender Arms.

In 1990 the
Indian Army left with 1155 of its cadre lost, without having performed eitherpart of their agreement under the Indo Sri
Lanka Peace Accord, leaving Sri
Lanka which had already performed its part
of the Agreement, with the terrorists problem more aggravated after the Indian
intervention with its Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord. And to make matters worse
with a 13 Amendment which Sri
Lanka had included post haste in to the
Constitution in good faith.

In ordinary circumstances as it would happen in
an ordinary contract the Party to the Agreement or Contract who fails to
perform his part of the contract is legally bound to pay compensation to the
other party,who had in good faith
performed his part of the contract.

But what is
happening to-day with regard to the Indo Sri Lanka Peace Accord is not normal ?

India which is legally responsible for the
breach of the Peace Accord still remains theParty that is dictating terms to Sri Lanka, which was made to suffer
not only materially but with the deaths
of tens of thousands of its youthful soldiers andeven more wounded, and large numbers of dead
and wounded civilians.

But India which lost only 1155 of its soldiers
cannot demand any thing from Sri Lanka, sighting the Indo Sri Lanka which had
been legally rescinded by India itself as a Party to the Peace Accord having
failed to perform its part of the Accord.

Now it is for Sri Lanka to demand India to pay
compensation, and India to accept that the India-Sri Lanka Peace Accordhas failed and that Sri Lanka is not bound
any more by the Peace Accord to respect
the inclusion of the 13Amendment forced into the Constitution of SriLanka, which Sri Lanka had accepted to do in good faith, expecting India
to honour its part of the Accord.

Sri Lanka political leadership nowbehaves like thieves who have been caught stealing
some thing from India
and indebted to it.

Sri Lanka has one thing to do , and that is to
remove the 13Amendment without consulting or informing India as if Sri
Lanka is a Vassal
State of India.

There was
no necessity for Sri Lanka to
have sent the Minister Basil Rajapakse to India
to inform India
of its proposal to hold the PSC with regard to removing certain parts of the
13Amerndment and requesting that the TNA be requested to be a part of the PSC.

The removal
or keeping of the 13 Amendment is a matter for Sri Lanka.The Indo Sri Lanka Pact through which the 13Amendment
had been introducedhas been rescinded
by India’s
failure to abide by its promise to
perform its part of the Agreement. India-Sri Lanka Peace Accord has no legal
value any more, nocourt woulddeny it.

It is the Sri
Lanka Government Leadership that is keeping the Indo-Sri
Lanka Peace Accord alive binding Sri Lanka to honour its pledge
(which it had already done). It is India that has not honoured its
pledge.

It is time that the President Mahinda Rajapakse
awakens to that fact and go ahead with the removal of the 13 Amendment and be
bold to face consequences.Ifthe President cannot get the 13 Amendment
Removed by PSC or using his executive powers, he should then go to the people,
to have the 13 Amendment removed by a referendum of the people.

The
Minister Basisl Rajapakse, the emissary of the President who was sent to inform
the Indian Minister of External Affairs Salman Khurshid and theIndian National SecurityAdviser Shiv Sankar Menon thatthe Government of Sri Lanka is proposing
small changes to the 13 Amendment, came back like akicked dog lapping his woundshaving achieved nothing and keeping mum about
his visit.

Only
thingBasil Rajapakse’s visit to India has done is that Sri Lanka has made giants of not
only Salman Kurshid and Shiv Sankar Menon, but also TNA which is now asking the
Government of Sri Lankato confine the
soldiers to their barracks.And the
Government of Sri Lanka seems to be acting as if it cannot to do any thing
without the assent of TNA.

It is a
shame that Sri Lanka
is unable to assert its right to do what it thinks is the best by its country
and by its people.We are not at all
indebted to India.India
had always been an enemy of Sri
Lanka and will continue to be so.It is only the President and his Government
that seem to be assiduously licking the posterior of India.

It was
reported that the the President Mahinda
Rajapaksa had told visiting Indian National Security Adviser Shiv Shankar Menon,
“……. that most of the points in the 13th Amendment will be
implemented”.And , “…that there were
issues in the clause dealing with land and police powers to the provinces and
that needs to be addressed by the Parliament Select Committee.”

The President had also requested
Menon to “….Convince the TNA to join the Committee.”Is it really necessary
thatIndia be informed that only small
things in the 13Amendment will be removed ?Why does not the President
realise that we have nothing to askIndia about
what we are doing with our constitution ?Does it really matter whether
TNA joins the PSC or not ?It is a Parliamentary
requirement that every member of the Parliament should respect the
Parliamentary procedures, if any member fails to respect those democratic
Parliamentary procedures they are in breach of the constitution and should be
impeached.Basil Rajapakse’s visit to India
to inform the affairs of our country to the Indian Leader Ship has only stirred
a hornet’s nest.Only statement Basil
Rajapakse had made since his return from India is that , “Some things can be
said openly and some things cannot be said openly in diplomatic business
between governments. They [India]
gave us some of their views, we expressed our views. That is what usually
happens .”If that is any thing to go
by, both the Government of Sri Lanka and that of India, share secrets of which
the people are allowed only the right to guess hoping that such secrets are in
their interest and that of the country.

Wednesday, 3 July 2013

The Defence
Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse has rightly said , “Sri
Lanka should not listen to India with regard to the
implementation of the 13th Amendment as the national problem was inherently one
that should be solved by Sri Lankans.” And added, “We should not listen to India on this; this doesn’t meant that we lose
the relationship we have with India.
But if there is a problem it should only be solved by Sri Lankans and not India,”

Perhaps as
the big neighbour next door we should tell India what we are doing .But India is not a friendly neighbour
though we try to make it look like it is our best friend.It was India’s manipulation into our
internal affairs that hasallowed it to
leave us with a sword of the Damocles. The time has come for us to remove it
before it would fall on our heads.

How can we
make India wise to look after it own business, when it is shivering with fear
not wanting to invoke the wrath of a foolish womanJayalalitha ofTamil Nadu.The great India is
dancing to the tune of a politically
inept Jayalalitha despite its claim to leadership in Asia.

In the
meantime we have our own foolish politicians who vow to take revenge from Sri Lanka if
the 13Amenment is removed.

How can one
understandVasudeva Nanyakkara’s
determination even to leave the Government if the 13 Amendment is removed
?The only reasonable explanation is
that he wants to please his son-in-law who is apparently a Tamil-the Judge Wigneswaran’s
son.

Thatis the explanation that could be drawn from
his subsequentstatement:

“We have
taken an oath to accept the Constitution and although there may be diverse
views regarding the 13th Amendment we have to accept it. It is the
democratic right of the people to hold such views as the complete repealing of
the 13th amendment or curtailing of its powers”

He is
sitting between two chairs, not wanting to sit lest he would fall.Vasudeva, orRajitha Senaratneleaving the
Government would be no great loss provided the government is able toremove theunwanted mole sticking out from the Constitution of Sri Lanka.

However, a wise advice to
the government comes from an unlikely person , from an unlikely party.Ravi Karunanayake from the UNP had said:“If, the government is really committed as it
says to diluting or scrapping devolution, do it now without looking for
scapegoats and adopting time wasting exercises such as Parliamentary Select
Committees. The ethnic conflict has been discussed for decades and all the
issues and solutions have been identified. “

And how true is what Ravi
Karunanayake says without mincing words: “The
only thing left to do is implementation which is not forthcoming obviously due
to the lack of guts in matching words with action.’’

When can we expect the
Government to develop its guts strong enough to do what is necessary, when its
pride in elimination of terrorism seems to be waning as time passes by.

In the meantime the
Government sends an emissary to India-Basil Rajapakse to meet Salman Kurshid
the External Affairs Minister of India , and its National Security Advisor
Shivasankar Menon, to" ….brief
them on the political situation including matters relating to the proposed
amendments to the thirteenth amendment."

Basil Rajapakse is
unfortunately not meeting the correct people in India , he should have met
Jayalalith instead as she is to-day the most politically important person in India,
Manmohan Singh playing second fiddle to her.

Who have become the most
vociferous people in Sri
Lanka ro-day ?

It is the MPs of the LTTE
proxi Party TNA.TNA MP Premachandran
says, “The aim of the PSC is to dilute the powers of the 13A. We can't agree to
that. We want 13 plus ”. Sampathan the
leader of the TNA has said, “….the attempt by the Government to weaken the 13th
Amendment comes despite its continued commitment to India and the UN to implement the
13th Amendment to the Constitution in full, and go beyond and build upon it so
as to achieve meaningful devolution.”

Sampanthan has added, that,
“……. in the absence of any Opposition member of Parliament, this PSC will be
nothing but a sub-committee of the Government Parliamentary Group and not a
Parliamentary Select Committee and will have no credibility whatsoever,”

In that case only thing
Sampanthan has to doto make the PSC
credible is to join it.If he does not
accept to participate in the PSC deliberations which is the most democratic
thing to do, then he has to accept the decisions of the PSC taken in their
absence.

In the mean
time Rauf Hakeem who had been trustedby
the government to make him the Minister of Justice of Sri Lanka had said, “ The
PSC must be put in the dust bin. There will be no main opposition, no TNA, no
SLMC", showing that he is the most unfit
person to be a trusted Minster of Justice of Sri Lanka.

As the
Minister of Justice he should understand that PSC is a democratic Parliamentary
procedure in keeping with the Constitution and it is the “duty” of every
parliamentarian to respect it and join its deliberations, and more so Rauf
Hakeem the Minister of Justice.

Sarath
Fonseka whose party is to contest the three PC elections has said, “… amending the 13th Amendment to the Constitution at this
juncture would disrupt the ethnic harmony in the country.”

It is not a correct evaluation of the 13Amendment. Theremoval of the 13 Amendmentanddrawingup a more representative
system of regional administration will give a voice to ordinary Tamil People,
who are now dominated by the high caste Tamil politicians who work for the
separation of the Tamil people from the rest of the Communities.

The 13 Amendment left as it is will give power not to the local Tamil
people at the grass root level but to those English speaking Vellalas from the
diaspora and proxi terrorist TNA MPs.

Perhaps it
would have been more appropriate to go to the people and remove the 13Amendment
by a referendum, instead of loosing further time removingclauses from here and there to water down the
effect of the 13 Amendment.

It is not a watered down 13 Amendment that is
necessary for Sri Lanka
but the complete removal of it.